ShaunR

I imagine it is C , C++ or Javascript. NULL is a specific type of invalid pointer in C/C++ languages and "not an object" in Javascript (as opposed to "undefined"). In LabVIEW we don't really have either concepts. In JSON, it is a valid type so it depends on how you want to translate it back into a LabVIEW type. Historically I have converted in the following manner: string->empty, numeric->0, boolean->false etc. Unless, of course, it is in quotes. In that case it is the string "NULL", in whatever case, as it's implicity typed.

Get someone else to do it. It requires knowledge of the memory organisation of LabVIEW and C (and how different structures are allocated and stored) and most of the time a small error will completely crash LabVIEW. I would suggest asking on a C forum.

This demonstrates the difference. reentrancy.zip

Well. This will get you some of the way there (quick and dirty example). SetWindowCompositionAttribute.vi You'll still need to blend the accent colours if you want it to behave and I've no idea what will happen if you try to set the VI transparency..

If your looking for the Aero style blur, then that is achieved using "SetWindowCompositionAttribute". I haven't used it, I'm just aware of it, but you'll probably find examples on Github.

If they have internal state memory then they have to be pre-allocated. TCPIP is the most flexible, works between executables and across networks. Events and queues if they are in the same application instance..

If you read a text file then it will work. However. as Jordan states; it is not an actual file. It's is a text output stream from the VFS.

That doesn't work. I would say it is a bug but it's never worked. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. This is what I have on my Linux box (not a cRIO though) so if you don't get anything; that is definitely a bug.

Sure. But you're not my target audience

OK. Got hold of my Linux Box with LabVIEW. Wire a number of bytes to the "Count" (1024?). Ignore the error 4 if you demand too many.

That [attitude] is somewhat problematic for me in that the toolkit isn't just used for connecting safely to servers but often used in laboratories for testing device vulnerabilities and compliance. Limiting the protocols and features because "it's not good practice" or "we don't think XYZ" isn't a good fit for me and this extends outside of just TLS (for example hashes) as the toolkit is also capable of generating certificates, signing/verification and the low-level stuff like raw Diffie Hellman calculations. Of course, I'm limited by the OpenSSL implementation but limiting further based on precieved wisdom isn't what I need.

I don't have a linux machine handy, right now, but try unchecking the "Convert EOL".

Although it may be easier from the User end, it's still fundamentally a port of OpenSSL but without FIPS support. LibreSSL doesn't support TLS1.3, currently, and according to their Git it's sitting at OpenSSL 1.0.1 so it will be a while before it has TLS1.3.

I was failry well insulated (historically) by the NI libraries, from that, since all the LabVIEW versions share the same binaries. NI wanted the binaries to be backwards compatible so they compiled them with the compatibilty flag (and a couple of their own functions). At the time I ummed and ahhd about using my own binaries and took the easy route-especially because of cross platform support where you had no idea what versions of openSSL where installed in Linux distributions on a day-to-day baisis. Not to mention the ball-ache of actually compiling them. Your preference for an intermediary binary definately has the advantage here by being able to dynamically load function pointers wheras I'm pretty stuck with one function breaks everything. I've just spent 3 days trying to get OpenSSL 1.1.1 to compile. Perl? Really? I thought CMake was bad I always do things the hard way, though, because I don't want any dependencies. If you look at all the Windows tutorials they are mainly for Visual Studio (dependency on the MS Runtime). Try and find one for MingW Add to that that I want the same names for 32 and 64 bit and voila! Configure nightmare. I refuse to use a thunking DLL for a library that size that changes the ABI on a whim. But finally I got a VM set up to build it (after finding out far more than I wanted to about Perl). I'm not touching that VM ever again. It will remain a whole VM just to build one library on one OS. Those that do are being really stingy with them too. Considering the exponential increase in address space you would have thought if you rented/bought a VPS they would give you more than one IPv6 out-of-the-box. Not a chance!

Yes. All it means is that I'm moving focus from the NI binaries to supplying my own. NI have usually been a couple of years behind the latest but my customers are demanding the latest (hence my questions about TLS1.3). Couple that with OpenSSL having recently made some ABI breaking changes between versions means that multi-version LabVIEW support is a little tricky if continuing with the NI binaries. So in LabVIEW 20XX you will have [probably] the long term support version of binaries and with mine you'll have the latest with backward compatibility to LabVIEW 2012.